idnits 2.17.1 draft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The abstract seems to contain references ([ITU.G872], [ITU.G694.1]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (June 29, 2017) is 2486 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Unused Reference: 'ITU.G698.2' is defined on line 392, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'ITU.G709' is defined on line 398, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'ITU.G874.1' is defined on line 408, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2119' is defined on line 414, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3473' is defined on line 419, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3945' is defined on line 425, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC5920' is defined on line 437, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6163' is defined on line 441, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC7699' is defined on line 459, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2629' is defined on line 473, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3410' is defined on line 477, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC4181' is defined on line 483, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2629 (Obsoleted by RFC 7749) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 13 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force G. Galimberti, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft D. La Fauci 4 Intended status: Informational Cisco 5 Expires: December 31, 2017 A. Zanardi, Ed. 6 L. Galvagni 7 FBK-CreateNet 8 June 29, 2017 10 Signaling extensions for Media Channel sub-carriers configuration in 11 Spectrum Switched Optical Networks (SSON) in Lambda Switch Capable (LSC) 12 Optical Line Systems. 13 draft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-01 15 Abstract 17 This memo defines the signaling extensions for managing Spectrum 18 Switched Optical Network (SSON) parameters shared between the Client 19 and the Network and inside the Network in accordance to the model 20 described in RFC 7698. The extensions are in accordance and 21 extending the parameters defined in ITU-T Recommendation 22 G.694.1.[ITU.G694.1] and its extensions and G.872.[ITU.G872]. 24 Copyright Notice 26 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 27 document authors. All rights reserved. 29 Status of This Memo 31 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 32 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 34 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 35 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 36 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 37 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 39 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 40 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 41 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 42 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 44 This Internet-Draft will expire on December 31, 2017. 46 Copyright Notice 48 Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 49 document authors. All rights reserved. 51 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 52 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 53 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 54 publication of this document. Please review these documents 55 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 56 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 57 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 58 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 59 described in the Simplified BSD License. 61 Table of Contents 63 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 64 2. Client interface parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 66 4. Signalling Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 67 4.1. New LSP set-up parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 68 4.2. Extension to LSP set-up reservation . . . . . . . . . . . 6 69 4.3. RSVP Protocol Extensions considerations . . . . . . . . . 9 70 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 71 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 72 7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 73 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 74 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 75 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 76 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 78 1. Introduction 80 Generalised Multiprotocol Label Switched (GMPLS) is widely used in 81 Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) to support the optical 82 circuits set-up through the signalling between Core Nodes and Edge 83 Nodes. This extension addresses the use cases described by [RFC7698] 84 Ch.3.3 and supports the information, needed in Spectrum Switched 85 Optical Network (SSON), to signal a Media Channel and the associated 86 carriers set request. The new set of parameters is related to the 87 Media Channel and the carrier(s) routed with it and keep the backward 88 compatibility with the WSON signalling. In particular this memo 89 wants do address the use cases where the SSON LSP (the Media Channel 90 in RFC7698) carries multiple carrier (OTSi) containing same Payload. 91 The set of the carriers can be seen as single Logical circuit. This 92 memo can be considered as the extension of [RFC7792]. The contents 93 and the parameters reflect the experimental activity on IP over SSON 94 recently done by some vendors and research consortia. 96 Figure 1 shows how the multiple carrier are mapped into a Media 97 Channel. A set of parameters must be shared on the UNI to allow the 98 GMPLS to do the proper routing and Spectrum Assignment and decide the 99 carrier position. 101 +------+ +------+ _________ +------+ +------+ 102 | E.N. | | C.N. | / /\ | C.N. | | E.N. | 103 | OTS1| ----- | || | || | ----- |OTS1 | 104 ==| OTS2| ----- | || Media | || | ----- |OTS2 |== 105 ==| OTS3| ----- | || Channel| || | ----- |OTS3 |== 106 | OTS4| ----- | || | || | ----- |OTS4 | 107 | | | ROADM| \________\/ | ROADM| | | 108 +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ 109 ^ ^ ^ ^ 110 | | | | 111 +---UNI---+ +---UNI---+ 113 E.N. = Edge Node - UNI Client 114 C.N. = Core Node - UNI Network 115 ROADM = Lambda/Spectrum switch 116 Media Channel = the optical circuit 117 OTSi = Carriers belonging to the same Network Media Channel (or 118 Super Channel) 119 UNI = Signallig interface 121 from Fig. 5.1/G.698.2 123 Figure 1: Multi carrier LSP 125 2. Client interface parameters 127 The Edge Node interface can have one or multiple carriers (OTSi). 128 All the carrier have the same characteristics and are provisionable 129 in terms of: 131 Number of subcarriers: 132 This parameter indicates the number of subcarriers available for 133 the super-channel in case the Transceiver can support multiple 134 carrier circuits. 136 Central frequency (see G.694.1 Table 1): 138 This parameter indicates the Central frequency value that Ss and 139 Rs will be set to work (in THz). See the details in Section 6/ 140 G.694.1 or based on "n" value explanation and the following "k" 141 values definition in case of multicarrier transceivers. 143 Central frequency granularity: 144 This parameter indicates the Central frequency granularity 145 supported by the transceiver, this value is combined with k and n 146 value to calculate the central frequency of the carrier or sub- 147 carriers. 149 Minimum channel spacing: 150 This is the minimum nominal difference in frequency (in GHz) 151 between two adjacent channels (or carriers) depending on the 152 Transceiver characteristics. 154 Bit rate / Baud rate of optical tributary signals: 155 Optical Tributary Signal bit (for NRZ signals) rate or Symbol (for 156 Multiple bit per symbol) rate . 158 FEC Coding: 159 This parameter indicate what Forward Error Correction (FEC) code 160 is used at Ss and Rs (R/W) (not mentioned in G.698.2). . 162 Wavelength Range (see G.694.1): [ITU.G694.1] 163 This parameter indicate minimum and maximum wavelength spectrum in 164 a definite wavelength Band (L, C and S). 166 Modulation format: 167 This parameter indicates the list of supported Modulation Formats 168 and the provisioned Modulation Format.. 170 Inter carrier skew: 171 This parameter indicates, in case of multi-carrier transceivers 172 the maximum skew between the sub-carriers supported by the 173 transceiver. 175 Laser Output power: 176 This parameter provisions the Transceiver Output power, it can be 177 either a setting and measured value. 179 receiver input power: 180 This parameter provisions the Min and MAX input pover suppotred by 181 the Transceiver, i.e. Receiver Sensitivity. 183 The above parameters are related to the Edge Node Transceiver and are 184 used by the Core Network GMPLS in order to calculate the optical 185 feasibility and the spectrum allocation. The parameters can be 186 shared between the Client and the Network via LMP or provisioned in 187 the Network by an EMS or an operator OSS. 189 3. Use Cases 191 The use cases are described in draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk 192 and [RFC7698] 194 4. Signalling Extensions 196 Some of the above parameters can be applied to RFC7699 (SENDER_TSPEC/ 197 FLOWSPEC). The above parameters could be applied to [RFC4208] 198 scenarios but they are valid also in case of non UNI scenarios. The 199 [RFC6205] parameters remain valid. 201 4.1. New LSP set-up parameters 203 When the E.N. wants to request to the C.N. a new circuit set-up 204 request or the GMPLS want to signal in the SSON network the Optical 205 Interface characteristics the following parameters will be provided 206 to the C.N.: 208 Number of available subcarriers (c): 209 This parameter is an integer. 211 Total bandwidth request: 212 e.g. 200Gb, 400Gb, 1Tb 214 Policy (strict/loose): 215 Strict/loose referred to B/W and subcarrier number. 217 Subcarrier bandwidth tunability: 218 (optional) e.g. 34Ghz, 48GHz. 220 Figure 2: The format of the this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = 221 TBA) is as follows: 223 0 1 2 3 224 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 225 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 226 |S|B| Number of Carriers | Client bandwidth | 227 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 228 | Subcarrier frequency tunability (optional) | 229 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 231 Sub-Transponder Mod Format: In the Value Field (96 bits) it is 232 specified 233 S strict number of subcarrier (No = 0, Yes = 1) 234 B strict client bandwidth (No = 0, Yes = 1) 235 - Num Carriers 236 - Client bandwidth (100Gb, 150Gb, 200Gb, 400Gb, 1Tb, etc) 237 - Subcarrier frequency tunability (optional) 239 Figure 2: SSON LSP set-up request 241 4.2. Extension to LSP set-up reservation 243 Once the GMPLS has calculated the Media Channel path, the Spectrum 244 Allocation, the Sub-carrier number and frequency, the modulation 245 format, the FEC and the Transmit power, sends back to the E.N. the 246 path set-up confirmation providing the values of the calculated 247 paramenters: 249 Media Channel: 250 (Grid, C.S., Identifier m and n). 252 List of subcarriers: 253 This parameter indicates the subcarriers to be used for the super- 254 channel in case the Transceiver can support multiple carrier 255 Circuits. 257 Central frequency (see G.694.1 Table 1): 258 Grid, Identifiers, central frequency and granularity. 260 Central frequency granularity: 261 This parameter indicates the Central frequency granularity 262 supported by the transceiver, this value is combined with K and n 263 value to calculate the central frequency on the carrier or sub- 264 carriers. 266 Bit rate / Baud rate of optical tributary signals: 268 Optical tributary signal bit (for NRZ signals) rate or Symbol (for 269 Multiple bit per symbol) rate. 271 FEC Coding: 272 This parameter indicate what Forward Error Correction (FEC) code 273 must be used by the Transceivers (not mentioned in G.698). . 275 Modulation format: 276 This parameter indicates the Modulation Formats to be set in the 277 Transceivers. 279 Laser Output power: 280 This parameter provisions the Transceiver Output power, it can be 281 either a setting and measured value. 283 Circuit Path, RRO, etc: 284 All these info are defined in [RFC4208]. 286 Path Error: 287 e.g. no path exist, all the path error defined in [RFC4208]. 289 Figure 3: The format of this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBA) is 290 as follows: 292 0 1 2 3 293 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 294 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 295 |S|I| Modulation ID | FEC | 296 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 297 | baud rate (Symbol Rate) | 298 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 300 Traffic Type 301 - R: standardized format 302 - I: input / output (1 / 0) 303 - Modulation IDs: BPSK, DC DP BSPSK, QPSK, DP QPSK, 8QAM, 304 16QAM, 16QAM, 64QAM, Hybrid, etc. 305 - FEC 306 - Baud Rate: IEEE float in bauds/s 308 For Each carrier inside the Media Channel the TLV is used: 310 0 1 2 3 311 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 312 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 313 | Grid| carrier Identifier | j | 314 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 315 | k | 316 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 317 | sub-carrier power | 318 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 320 Carrie set-up: 322 - Media channel Grid 323 +----------+---------+ 324 | Grid | Value | 325 +----------+---------+ 326 |ITU-T Flex| 3 | 327 +----------+---------+ 329 - Sub carrier identifier field: sub-carrier 330 identifier inside the mediachannel 331 - J field: granularity of the channel spacing, can be a 332 multiple of 0.01GHz. - default value is 0.1GHz. 333 - K field: positive or negative integer (including 0) to multiply 334 by J and identify the S.C. Position inside the 335 Media Channel, J can be set at default value = 0.1GHz. 336 - sub-carrier power: subcarrier output power to be set (optional ?) 338 In summary S.C. Frequency = MC-C.F. (in THz) + K * J GHz 340 m=8 341 +-------------------------------X------------------------------+ 342 | | | 343 | sub-carrier sub-carrier | 344 | +----------X----------+ | +----------X----------+ | 345 | | OTSi | | OTSi | | 346 | | o | | | o | | 347 | | | | | | | | 348 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 349 --+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+- 350 | n=4 | 351 K1 -236 | +236 k2 353 <------------------------ Media Channel -----------------------> 354 Figure 3: OCh_General 356 4.3. RSVP Protocol Extensions considerations 358 The additional information described in the draft, is related to the 359 Media Channel supported traffic. It could be encoded as specific 360 extensions of the SENDER_TSPEC/FLOW_SPEC object for Flexi-Grid 361 networks (see [RFC7792]) 363 5. Security Considerations 365 GMPLS message security uses IPsec, as described in xxxx. This 366 document only defines new UNI objects that are carried in existing 367 UNI messages, similar to the UNI objects in xxx. This document does 368 not introduce new security considerations. 370 6. IANA Considerations 372 T.B.D. 374 7. Contributors 376 Antonello Bonfanti 377 Cisco 378 Via Santa Maria Molgora, 48 c 379 20871 - Vimercate (MB) 380 Italy 381 abonfant@cisco.com 383 8. References 385 8.1. Normative References 387 [ITU.G694.1] 388 International Telecommunications Union, ""Spectral grids 389 for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid"", 390 ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2, February 2012. 392 [ITU.G698.2] 393 International Telecommunications Union, "Amplified 394 multichannel dense wavelength division multiplexing 395 applications with single channel optical interfaces", 396 ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2, November 2009. 398 [ITU.G709] 399 International Telecommunications Union, "Interface for the 400 Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-T Recommendation 401 G.709, February 2012. 403 [ITU.G872] 404 International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of 405 optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872, 406 October 2012. 408 [ITU.G874.1] 409 International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport 410 network (OTN): Protocol-neutral management information 411 model for the network element view", ITU-T Recommendation 412 G.874.1, October 2012. 414 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 415 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 416 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 417 . 419 [RFC3473] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 420 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol- 421 Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, 422 DOI 10.17487/RFC3473, January 2003, 423 . 425 [RFC3945] Mannie, E., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 426 Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, 427 DOI 10.17487/RFC3945, October 2004, 428 . 430 [RFC4208] Swallow, G., Drake, J., Ishimatsu, H., and Y. Rekhter, 431 "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) User- 432 Network Interface (UNI): Resource ReserVation Protocol- 433 Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Support for the Overlay 434 Model", RFC 4208, DOI 10.17487/RFC4208, October 2005, 435 . 437 [RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 438 Networks", RFC 5920, DOI 10.17487/RFC5920, July 2010, 439 . 441 [RFC6163] Lee, Y., Ed., Bernstein, G., Ed., and W. Imajuku, 442 "Framework for GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE) 443 Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)", 444 RFC 6163, DOI 10.17487/RFC6163, April 2011, 445 . 447 [RFC6205] Otani, T., Ed. and D. Li, Ed., "Generalized Labels for 448 Lambda-Switch-Capable (LSC) Label Switching Routers", 449 RFC 6205, DOI 10.17487/RFC6205, March 2011, 450 . 452 [RFC7698] Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Casellas, R., Ed., Zhang, F., 453 Fu, X., Ceccarelli, D., and I. Hussain, "Framework and 454 Requirements for GMPLS-Based Control of Flexi-Grid Dense 455 Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Networks", 456 RFC 7698, DOI 10.17487/RFC7698, November 2015, 457 . 459 [RFC7699] Farrel, A., King, D., Li, Y., and F. Zhang, "Generalized 460 Labels for the Flexi-Grid in Lambda Switch Capable (LSC) 461 Label Switching Routers", RFC 7699, DOI 10.17487/RFC7699, 462 November 2015, . 464 [RFC7792] Zhang, F., Zhang, X., Farrel, A., Gonzalez de Dios, O., 465 and D. Ceccarelli, "RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in 466 Support of Flexi-Grid Dense Wavelength Division 467 Multiplexing (DWDM) Networks", RFC 7792, 468 DOI 10.17487/RFC7792, March 2016, 469 . 471 8.2. Informative References 473 [RFC2629] Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629, 474 DOI 10.17487/RFC2629, June 1999, 475 . 477 [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, 478 "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet- 479 Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, 480 DOI 10.17487/RFC3410, December 2002, 481 . 483 [RFC4181] Heard, C., Ed., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of 484 MIB Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, DOI 10.17487/RFC4181, 485 September 2005, . 487 Authors' Addresses 488 Gabriele Galimberti (editor) 489 Cisco 490 Via S. Maria Molgora, 48 c 491 20871 - Vimercate 492 Italy 494 Phone: +390392091462 495 Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com 497 Domenico La Fauci 498 Cisco 499 Via S. Maria Molgora, 48 c 500 20871 - Vimercate 501 Italy 503 Phone: +390392091946 504 Email: dlafauci@cisco.com 506 Andrea Zanardi (editor) 507 FBK-CreateNet 508 via alla Cascata 56/D 509 38123 Povo, Trento 510 Italy 512 Phone: +390461312450 513 Email: azanardi@fbk.eu 515 Lorenzo Galvagni 516 FBK-CreateNet 517 via alla Cascata 56/D 518 38123 Povo, Trento 519 Italy 521 Phone: +390461312427 522 Email: lgalvagni@fbk.eu